Last post on Feb 25, 2013 at 4:53 AM
You are in the Ford Focus
What is this discussion about?
Ford Focus, Ford, Car Buying, Future Vehicle, Coupe, Hatchback, Sedan, Wagon
#1013 of 1316 Re: Poor fuel economy [gogogodzilla]
Jan 04, 2012 (9:18 pm)
I also purchased a 2012 focus SEL in December and I am seeing the same issue. Not very happy with the gas mileage that I am getting when it is rated for 38mpg. I have not taken my car to the dealership yet, but when I spoke to a service advisor on the phone today, he didn't seem to think there was anything wrong with the vehicle.
I am now at 2500 miles and have not seen any major improvement on gas mileage. I am stuck at around 27mpg.
I do remember reading some post about Ford changing their shifting algorithm programming in Focus vehicles built past AUG/SEP timeframe to solve an issue with gears grinding or something like that. When I asked the service technician about this over the phone, he seemed reluctant to say anything about it and just kind of denied that there was a change.
Please let me know if you make any progress and find a way to get anywhere near the advertised mpg.
#1014 of 1316 Re: Poor fuel economy [hello1234]
Jan 05, 2012 (4:12 am)
Funny thing about the EPA ratings for the Focus (and for pretty much every other car out there), even though the Automatic is rated to get better fuel economy than the Manual, per the EPA web site, the anecdotal reports from users show just the opposite.
In the case of the Focus, the EPA web site shows two Automatics, one with a city/combo/highway rating of 28/31/38 and the second with 27/31/37 rating. They also show one Manual which has a rating of 26/30/36, however the column titled "Our User's Average MPG" shows "real world" fuel economy of 32.8, 31.2, and 33.4 miles per gallon respectively.
I'm thinking if Ford was to offer a 6-Speed manual like much of their competition, the "real world" fuel economy of the Manual models may well jump up even higher.
#1015 of 1316 Re: Poor fuel economy [shipo]
Jan 05, 2012 (6:51 am)
Wow - 3 people. That's a huge sample size.
I've driven both my daughter's 2012 Focii (first one was totalled) and was easily able to achieve 30-32 mpg just driving around the house.
Winter fuel plus ethanol E-10 will kill fuel economy for everyone.
Put it in manual mode and make sure it's in 6th gear on the highway. I would suggest waiting for warmer weather and summer fuel before getting too concerned. I don't think the reprogramming would have any effect on fuel economy.
#1016 of 1316 Re: Poor fuel economy [akirby]
Jan 05, 2012 (8:02 am)
You must have a VERY big house!
Keep in mind some areas including Twin Cities have "winter fuel" aka E10 all year 'round, to reduce smog. So lower FE in winter would have more to do with lower temperatures, longer warmups etc. than fuel type.
#1017 of 1316 Re: Poor fuel economy [backy]
Jan 05, 2012 (8:24 am)
One of the turns at the end of the hallway is tight but the rest of the house is wide open.
I thought winter fuel was more than just E-10 but I'm no expert. For some reason I usually get better fuel economy in winter than summer (Atlanta). Then again my car is garaged at night so morning warm-up is easier.
Edit: it's butane or propane that makes the difference between winter and summer fuel - it changes the Vapor Pressure to respond to higher temps in summer. Not sure what effect E-10 has on RVP if any, but I'm sure E-10 winter blend fuel is the worst you can get for FE.
#1018 of 1316 Re: Poor fuel economy [akirby]
Jan 05, 2012 (8:44 am)
I'll lay odds that when the sample size gets into the thousands the trend will continue; the Manual will return better fuel economy than the Automatic. Why am I so confident? This phenomena isn't unique to Ford, virtually every car I've looked at (regardless of manufacturer) which has a higher EPA mileage rating for the Automatic shows higher Real World mileage for the Manual.
#1019 of 1316 Re: Poor fuel economy [shipo]
Jan 05, 2012 (9:16 am)
I am still very skeptical of reports, anecdotal or otherwise of "Real World Mileage". Please tell me where you are getting these numbers from.
#1020 of 1316 Re: Poor fuel economy [shipo]
Jan 05, 2012 (9:17 am)
I don't necessarily doubt that part - I was referring to the reported fuel economy.
#1021 of 1316 Re: Poor fuel economy [shipo]
Jan 05, 2012 (9:52 am)
Well, why don't we wait until the reports get at least into the hundreds before proof is offered up. How many thousands of Focus have been sold and there are three reports? I have a feeling that many people that take the time to report their MPG on the EPA website are very careful about their driving habits and possibly even use hypermiling techniques. I think it would be prudent to throw out the highs and lows to get some kind of reasonable result. Until you have some pretty big numbers of reports it means nothing IMO. Not that they are fibbing or anything but I think until you get really big numbers of reports that the results just shouldn't be touted as "proof". Especially when we have no idea who is making these reports or if they are accurate.
#1022 of 1316 Re: Poor fuel economy [markus5]
Jan 05, 2012 (9:55 am)
The EPA web site.